The Fake Truther Store

I realize this particular page is nearly six years old, 9/6/2015, but doing research on an unrelated matter I got side tracked and read it for a good laugh!

Let's start with the url – the truther store – really?? That publishes absolute false narratives!! I copied and pasted the original, and decided to ask the obvious questions:

1. The Department of Homeland Security and other privately held government contractors, such as the Federal Reserve and the Postal Security Service, have not purchased over 2 billion rounds of ammunition, to include hollow point rounds. They also have not purchased over 2000 Mine Resistant Armored Personnel (MRAPS) for domestic use, or tens of thousands of M4 Carbine semi-automatic rifles.

Response: Postal Security Service? Had to look that one up and come to the conclusion it is a typo of Mail Security Center, the new politically correct name for the United States Postal Service or USPS. However, US Postal Service Announces Giant Ammo Purchase, and hundreds of other reliable websites, including wnd and newsmax, reported the same story.

I am inclined to believe it is true, many government agencies purchased weapons, ammunition, and hired people for their private army. FEMA refurbished emergency camps to be "political re-education camps". FEMA also purchased enough guillotines to eliminate 10 million people per day. It was reported they were being stored in warehouses in Oregon, Washington, Texas, and Pennsylvania, with the millions of plastic coffins they purchased.

As of September 2020, $1.6 Billion in surplus military gear has been purchased by local police departments across the nation. Which I find far more worrisome than knowing a government agency has purchased weapons and ammunition. Apparently the USPS didn't order MRAPS but Uganda did!

2. There are no specifically built "FEMA camps" designed to house domestic or foreign refugees in the event of disaster or financial collapse.

Response: You are correct the FEMA camps are not to house domestic or foreign refugees in the event of a disaster or financial collapse - they are to hold political dissidents, aka conservatives and republicans, who will be rounded up for political re-education, if the democrats can't get their socialist/communist ideology shoved down the throats of the American public.

3. The government does not, and has not staged "FALSE FLAG" events in order to create "PROBLEM/REACTION/SOLUTION" style incidents which justify the necessary curbing of rights of private citizens in the interest of "SECURITY".

Really??

Sandy Hook, a defunct elementary school shot to pieces, to "scare" Americans into relinquishing their guns and generating numerous bills which violate the Second Amendment.

The 'muslim" non-event in California? 

How about the government orchestrated disaster of 9/11? To "prove" America needs to send troops to get Osama Bin Laden, because he has WMD's, and the creation of the wholly unConstitutional Patriot act?

The Boston bombing, to show Americans they are not safe in America, full of fake news stories, including the death of the brother, who minutes later got up off the road and into a car with blacked out windows?

Fast and Furious, the obama administration sold guns and ammunition to the Mexican drug cartel to increase violence along the US/Mexico border? Many American border patrol agents were murdered with those guns!

I am sure there are MANY more! Follow the money, do your own research and stop believing anything main stream media tells you!

4. The government has not coordinated the recent influx of underage illegal immigrants at many points on our border with Mexico in order to push an "IMMIGRATION REFORM AGENDA".

Response: Really?? Then why was the false President Soetoro, aka obama, PAID for every juvenile who came across the border? Why have democrats been screeching about immigration reform for DECADES?

Why have democrats been coaching invaders, aka illegal immigrants, to say the "right" things when they "request asylum"?

5. The Federal government and state legislatures are not fabricating artificial points of contention among its citizenry by passing legislation to protect the civil and legal rights of homosexuals and transgendered citizens.

Response: Fabricating artificial points of contention? The Federal government, state legislatures, and most politicians demand heterosexuals "play along" with the delusions of members of the LGBTQ community, if that isn't meant to fabricate artificial points of contention then why?

LGBTQ members have taken a step above blacks for unequal preference on job applications to ensure every work place is "diverse", to meet federal diversity guidelines.

LGBTQ business owners are allowed to refuse services to heterosexual customers but are supported by 'laws', courts, and politicians when they sue because a Christian heterosexual refuses them services.

6. There is NOT an international child sex prostitution ring. Children are not being exploited for any reason, and are not being abused in any way, are not being used for purposes of BRIBERY or BLACKMAIL. The children are just fine.

Response: Then why was there a need for democraps to create a 'keep families together act'?

Yea, the island owned by Epstein just happened to have cages filed with small children, pregnant teenage girls, and boys who had been sexually molested. It is obvious the women who passed through those cells produced them all. No child has ever been abducted, molested, and killed by a stranger. Yes, I am being sarcastic.

The Clinton's have a LONG history of purchasing children for sexual gratification. Biden's proclivities for immature sex partners is well documented. But, it could be pure coincidence, that like the Clintons, Biden also owned an island very near pedo island.

Too bad there isn't someone who knows about the world sex trafficking of children, like maybe some one who worked closely with Epstein, or right, Ghislaine Maxwell!

There is a reason Epstein's plane was named the Lolita Express! Many people have know it for YEARS!

7. The United States government does not, and has never in the past, SOLD OR GIVEN weapons and ammunition to any party or group affiliated with the enemies of the State, or any rebel faction who opposes any enemy of the United States.

Response: Fast and furious was just a myth? A fabrication to make Soetoro look bad? Say it isn't so, the whistle blowers wouldn't have fabricated that kind of evidence, would they? The border patrol agents just happened to die from random gun fire from their co-workers? Wonder how the bullets traced back to American military surplus? How could the Mexican drug cartel have gotten ahold of them?

8. The United States government does not, and has never in the past, TRAFFICKED OR SOLD DRUGS within or without American borders or controlled waters.

Response: I thought it was common knowledge that the US government is the largest drug dealer on the planet! Isn't that why the Bush administration assigned American troops to guard poppy fields in the middle east? Research shows the Bush family actually OWN the land those poppies are growing on. Is that why the report of the ship, filled with drugs, owned by McConell's wife's family was hushed up so quickly?

9. The United States government has never OBFUSCATED OR FABRICATED INFORMATION used to justify the involvement of our armed forces in any military engagement, past or present.

Response: Isn't that exactly what the CIA, FBI, and many other government agencies do? What?? You mean is was just happenstance that our Navy moved ALL the destroyers into Pearl Harbor? 

I bet you don't believe the Navy is manipulating the weather, even after they admitted it! Not just the weather, they can create earthquakes, tsunami's, and all manner of earthly calamities!

10. There are no individual or collective human beings on the planet who have designs and plans of "WORLD DOMINATION". There are no plans to implement a "NEW WORLD ORDER". There are no plans for "GLOBAL POPULATION CONTROL," in any form, by any group or individual.

Response: Tell that to the Rothschilds, Bilderbergers, Cavendishs, Medicis, Hanover, Habsburg, Krupp, Plantagenet, Rockefeller, Romanov, Sinclair, Warburgs, and Windsors. Go read Agenda 21 and realize it is real, it is true, and it is happening, these families have invested more than 60 years in the slow take over of the world.

11. There is no plan inherent in the current economic paradigm of capitalism to intentionally inflate the value of money to the point of uselessness. The central banking system made up of the Federal Reserve, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank DOES NOT have a globalist social agenda, and has no intention to cause worldwide economic downturn by controlling the money that we use to execute our day to day life.

Response: Anyone who believes this is delusional, blind or plain naïve! The federal reserve is a PRIVATE bank owned by the afore mentioned elite families, who have previously admitted to having a world depopulation agenda. They will keep those who can be of benefit to them, everyone else is obsolete.

12. The leadership of the United States does not believe that in order to establish security for it’s citizens, it is necessary to limit freedoms and liberties. There is NO ATTACK on the rights of citizens as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution as a whole.

Response: Then why do they keep doing it? The first amendment, freedom of speech, is only allowed when you pay for a proper license to exercise your right to freedom of speech, unless you are of a 'minority' race, funded by the democrats, or want to infuriate you fellow human beings! Every 'freedom' in the bill of rights has in some way been monetized, limited, or infringed!

13. There is no movement by the Democratic Senate to repeal the 1st Amendment of the Constitution, and replace it with a much longer, and much less "FREE" version of it. That was an internet hoax played on the people of this country by Ted Cruz and it’s comedic leadership.

Response: The democrat politicians want to completely destroy the US Constitution. They have admitted it, they would rather see this country burn than thrive! Ted Cruz? Oh right, Raphael Cruz, who calls himself Ted, because he doesn't want people to know his father is a Cuban; the person married to someone who literally helped draft the document that will dissolve the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence to install the New World Order, ya right!! LOL

14. Economic markets are established by the will of the consumer, and fulfilled by manufacturers. The prices of goods and commodities are set by supply and demand ONLY and are not manipulated in any way by governments, banks, or multi-national corporations.

Response: Not manipulated? What do you call it when manufacturers are PAID, by the government, to NOT produce goods and commodities?

The 'oil shortage' that caused the gas crisis in the 70's was imaginary?

The government pulling currency out of circulation in the late 1920's and early 1930's didn't cause the stock market to crash or the depression that followed? If that isn't manipulation of the markets, please enlighten us as to what would/could be called manipulation?

15. The government of the United States, particularly its legislature, ARE NOT influenced by groups of people or corporations to create laws and regulations that are in the interest of their profit.

Response: You think those bribes the politicians take don't influence their bad decisions and acts of treason, to the determent of the American people?

16. The leadership of the United States government, or it’s states, ARE NOT corruptible by foreign, monetary, or political interests, and DO NOT receive compensation in the form of cash, gifts, or high positions in private industry.

Response: Is that why Biden, as vice president, withheld America aid to the Ukraine until they fired the attorney investigating his son, quid pro quo, then bragged about it! Yes, EVERY crime the democraps have attempted to charge Trump with they actually committed!

Then you tell me how a politician getting $175,00 a year from the American tax payer manage to become millionaires in months!

17. The US State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency have never engaged in the inciting of uprisings of a foreign populous, nor have they ever installed a proxy leader who is amenable to the American interests of "POLITICAL INFLUENCE".

Response: Wonder what life is like believing everyone is honest, truthful, and actually doing what is in the best interest of the people of the united States?! It has been proven many times over the American alphabet agencies have placed rulers, they can control, in power in foreign countries.

18. "OIL" has never been, and never will be, a singular cause for war. It has never been a primary cause for war. The production of energy for uses of locomotion and electricity by the consumption of oil are not important enough reasons to kill or be killed. The governments of the world understand this.

Response: Why not? Human fight over the dumbest things! Do you have an alternative reason for the stupidity of every war that has ever taken place? Land? Power? Oil? Control? They are all excuses to start a war!

19. All of the things that seem to be happening, in the way they seem to be happening, are not happening. Rest assured that the interest of the common man are paramount to those elite who control the systems and machinations of this world. What you are witnessing is the struggle for our good leaders to cope with an increasingly complex and dangerous world. What is done by our leaders is in the best interest of the ENTIRE human race, regardless of social standing and station, economic worth, ability to produce, political affiliation, sexual and gender identity, race, creed, color, or religious belief.

Response: Those elite who control the systems and machinations of this world?? I thought you said you didn't believe there were elite who want to take over the world and no New World Order, number 10. But everyone who thinks there is evil in the world which does not want the best for the common man is delusional? In what dream could anyone believe those in power are truly concerned about anyone other than themselves, their families, and their bank accounts?? Tell that to the people of Venezuela!

Democrat will not rest until America is in the same financial position!

Early Morning Shenanigans

A family was awakened at 2:30 in the morning on 7/11/2020, to a phone call from the local police telling them that there are officers at the front door. The woman of the house had to have them repeat this information three times before it registered in her sleep fogged brain.

When 'woman of the house' made the mistake of opening the front door and stepping out to talk to them she was informed by the officer; they were coming in the house to see that everyone is OK, and they don't need a search warrant.

Then the officer wanted to know who is in the house, and what they are doing. The resident cooperated far more than they should have. But like most people they grew up respecting the police and reluctantly answered their questions.

The officer threatened to use force when the woman told him no he can't enter the house, he took hold of her wrist and was trying to force her to his partner when the husband appeared in the kitchen door. The officer quickly let go of the womans wrist!

The problems with this encounter are:

1. When officers roll up on a house at 2:30 in the morning and the house is dark, the yard gates are locked, nobody is in the yard, and they have to have dispatch call the house to get someone to the door the chances of the 'report' being false are highly likely!
2. Being questioned about a knife fight on the front porch, given the above observations, the officers should have reasonable suspicion the report was false and probable cause to believe the person coming to the door is not going to lie!
3. While answering questions about the reason for the early morning visit, the resident was treated as though they were lying, then 'warned' that they (the officers) ARE coming in the house and they don't need a warrant.
4. Given the facts from statement #1 above, the officers who climbed the fence to enter the property were trespassing, breaking and entering, disrupting the residents peaceful enjoyment, intrusion, and burglary for entering private property without just cause.
5. ANY time a person's reasonable expectation of privacy could be invaded a search warrant IS required! Since there were no obvious signs of a crime being committed there was no reason to continue onto the property, dispatch or who ever called could have had someone in the house meet the officers at the fence! If there was any type of disturbance, or even lights on in the house, or a fight of any kind were in progress a search warrant would not be required!

Most people understand that police officers are a necessary evil. In this incident the police were used as pawns by an unscrupulous person(s) to harass, intimidate, and threaten innocent citizens! This certainly can not be an isolated incident. In cases like this, it shows the over bearance police forces!

Should we defund the police for their 'abuse of power'? Of course not, that would be ridiculous! However, common sense has to be a part of their decisions, treating everyone as though they are guilty until they can prove their innocence is not an effective way to maintain friendly community relations!! Especially when visual observation of the residence shows no signs of any event that could be remotely misconstrued to match what was reported!

How are false reported handled at the police station after contact has been made and it is obviously a false report?

If the police are falsely notified of a possible crime by an 'anonymous' voice on the phone, website form, or any other form of communication, how can the accused believe in justice?

How can you call it a justice system when innocent people are accused with NO means of filing charges against a false accuser?

How is it justice when someone knowingly, willingly, maliciously, and falsely accuses others of a crime but the accuser is not punished for their false allegation/report?

If it is not an anonymous report, why is the accused not immediately given the accusers information?

The answers to these questions should be reason enough to never allow anonymous 'reports' of any alleged illegal activity!!

Colorado Statute 18-8-111 (1)(a)(I)(B)

(II) He or she makes a report or knowingly causes the transmission of a report to law enforcement authorities of a crime or other incident within their official concern when he or she knows that it did not occur;

(III) He or she makes a report or knowingly causes the transmission of a report to law enforcement authorities pretending to furnish information relating to an offense or other incident within their official concern when he or she knows that he or she has no such information or knows that the information is false; ?or

1) If the accuser has no idea whether or not the incident they are reporting actually happened, is it false reporting?

2) If an accuser merely believes an incident happened, even when it didn't, is it false reporting?

How is the accused supposed to trust the 'justice' system when they have no recourse to collect damage done to them by false allegations/reports to the police?

Some may ask: what damage was done? The answer is simple being awakened in the early morning hours, being treated like a criminal, having one's privacy invaded, the possibility of negative implication the allegations could have on the accused's employment, being slandered, and the inability to charge the person who made the false allegation!

Many don't trust the police, judges, or the 'justice' system!

The Sixth Amendment provides that a person accused of a crime has the right to confront a witness against him or her in a criminal action.

If this incident wasn't reported as a 'criminal action' why did the police enter private property, over a fence with locked gates, at 2:30 in the morning?

If the city wants to claim the false allegation as theirs, then the scope of the injustice done to innocent residents greatly increases! Because that means they are 'protecting' the actual person who filed the false report, aiding and abetting criminal activity (false reporting), and abusing their power! Which means they can show up at any house at anytime and claim some one reported something, even when nobody did!

The residents are supposed to believe the police wouldn't falsify reports to increase revenue for the city? Especially since the city (mayor and city council) has already grossly abused their power and closed 'non-essential' businesses! More Constitutional rights have been violated in the name of 'public safety' than most people are willing to count!

All the residents of the afore mentioned residence were slandered to the police. It is possible the false report of a knife fight on the front porch, at 2:30 in the morning, was a malicious effort to get at least one person in the home fired.

The woman should have called 911 to verify the caller ID of the previous call was correct and it was in fact officers at the front door. What are the ramifications, given the facts above, of officers crossing a fence with locked gates, onto private property, without probable cause?

Decades of Destruction

Elected officials, representatives, or other members of the United States government, named below, have knowingly, willingly and maliciously, by the acceptance and passage of laws that restrict, regulate, and/or infringe on the Constitutionally protected right of the citizens to have and bear arms as protected by Amendment II of the Constitution of the United States of America.

In direct violation of 5 U.S. Code § 7311, 18 U.S.C. 241, and or 18 U.S. Code § 242, by the above named actions the elected officials have attempted to over throw the Republic form of government, the protections provided by the Republic form of government, and blatantly, openly, and with treasonous intent passed restrictive laws which deprive the citizens of their rights, privileges, or immunities secured and/or protected by the Constitution, including, but not limited to, forcing citizens to pay fees for background checks, purchase government regulated concealed carry permits, which is nothing more than the government forcing citizens to pay for registration and licensing before being able to exercise a specific protected right.

With the passage and legislation of these laws the people involved in drafting, developing, and submitting these laws have 'legalized' violations of Amendment IV, with unreasonable search of  papers and effects which violates the citizens right to privacy.

These same elected, appointed, or otherwise employed representatives have conspired with each other to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate the citizens of the United States of America (USA) in their free exercise and/or enjoyment of their rights and/or privileges secured to them by the Constitution which is a direct violation of 18 U.S. Code § 241.

1. Feb. 6, 2019 HR 1025 - UIGHUR Act of 2019, 116th Congress (2019-2020)
2. Dec. 6, 2017 HR 38 Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, 116th Congress -  Bill Passed - House
3. March 16, 2017 HR 1181 Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act 115th Congress - Bill Passed - House
4. Feb. 2, 2017 H J Res 40 Providing for congressional disapproval of the rule submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 Joint Resolution, 115th Congress - Passed - House
5. Feb. 26, 2016 HR 2406 Sportsmen's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act of 2015, 114th Congress - Bill Passed - House
6. July 16, 2014 H Amdt 1098 Prohibits District of Columbia from Implementing Certain Firearm Laws Amendment Adopted - House
7. Nov. 16, 2011 HR 822 Requiring State Reciprocity for Carrying Concealed Firearms Bill Passed - House
8. July 28, 2010 HR 5827 Exempting Guns from an Estate for Bankruptcy Purposes Bill Passed - House
9. May 20, 2009 HR 627 Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 Concurrence Vote Passed - House
10. Sept. 17, 2008 HR 6842 Repealing Portions of the D.C. Firearm Ban Bill Passed - House
11. Sept. 26, 2006 HR 5092 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bill Passed - House
12. June 28, 2006 H Amdt 1156 Trigger Lock Amendment Amendment Adopted - House
13. Oct. 20, 2005 S 397 Firearms Manufacturers Protection Bill Bill Passed - House
14. April 9, 2003 HR 1036 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act Bill Passed - House
15. July 10, 2002 HR 4635 Arming Pilots Against Terrorism Act Bill Passed - House
16. June 18, 1999 H Amdt 215 24 Hour Background Check Amendment Amendment Adopted - House
17. June 18, 1999 H Amdt 216 72 Hour Background Check Amendment Amendment Rejected - House
18. June 18, 1999 HR 2122 Mandatory Gun Show Background Check Act Bill Failed - House
19. Feb. 24, 1998 HR 424 Minimum Sentences for Gun Crimes Bill Passed - House
20. March 22, 1996 HR 125 Gun Ban Repeal Act of 1995 Bill Passed - House
21. May 5, 1994 HR 4296 Regulation of Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons Bill Passed - House
22. Nov. 23, 1993 HR 1025 Brady Handgun Bill Conference Report Adopted - House
23. Nov. 10, 1993 H Amdt 390 Instant Background Checks for Gun Purchase Amendment Amendment Adopted - House
24. Nov. 10, 1993 HR 1025 Brady Handgun Bill Bill Passed - House

In view of the aforementioned facts, we the people and citizens of the United States do hereby demand the immediate resignation of the following:

Nancy Pelosi

Chuck Schumer
Maxine Waters
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Ilhan Omar
Kamala Harris
Cory Booker
Fredricka Wilson
Kirsten Gillibrand
and ALL other elected representatives that voted yea/yes on the above mentioned bills that obviously infringe on the Second Amendment! There are decades of documented violations of the US Constitution, specifically the Second Amendment!

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

No where does the Second Amendment mention the local, county, state, or federal government having the authority or power to determine whether ANY person is worthy, eligible, and/or mentally capable of possessing or owning a gun/firearm, including people who were previously convicted of a felony, under the current oppressive laws.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

While the Right to Privacy is mentioned in other Amendments, it is considered one of the rights of a free people. All background checks violate that right to privacy by forcing the consumer to divulge private personal information to strangers who may or may not use that information for nefarious purposes!

5 U.S. Code § 7311 - Loyalty and striking

An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he—
(1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;
(2) is a member of an organization that he knows advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;
(3) participates in a strike, or asserts the right to strike, against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia; or
(4) is a member of an organization of employees of the Government of the United States or of individuals employed by the government of the District of Columbia that he knows asserts the right to strike against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia.
_{(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 524.)}

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
_{(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 696; Pub. L. 90–284, title I, §?103(a), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, §?7018(a), (b)(1), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, §?60006(a), title XXXII, §§?320103(a), 320201(a), title XXXIII, §?330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1970, 2109, 2113, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§?604(b)(14)(A), 607(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3511.)}

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
_{(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 696; Pub. L. 90–284, title I, §?103(b), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, §?7019, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, §?60006(b), title XXXII, §§?320103(b), 320201(b), title XXXIII, §?330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1970, 2109, 2113, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§?604(b)(14)(B), 607(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3511.)}

Government Overreach or Regulation

The false POTUS, from 2008 to 2016, signed the Affordable Care Act into law in 2010 to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance, and to decrease the cost of healthcare.
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012) The Supreme Court held 5-4 that the individual mandate was legitimate, because it was in essence a tax, and struck down the provision that would withhold funds for states which did not expand the program.
However, the bigger issues are never mentioned -

1. Does the federal, state, county, or local government have the power to demand the people engage in financial transactions (contract) with a third party?
2. When, where, and how did the 'government' acquire this power?
3. IF the federal government has the power mentioned above, is it reasonable to believe they can also demand citizens purchase vehicles, to legitimize the requirement to purchase 'car' insurance?
4. IF the federal government has the powers mentioned above, is it reasonable to believe they can also 'regulate' what types, brands, and/or design of vehicle, or any other product, can be made available to the people?
5. IF the federal government has the powers mentioned above, is it reasonable to believe the government can also demand the people only buy 'healthy' food, by removing all products the government deems as 'unhealthy' from the retail market?
6. Unless the government removes all private health care companies and only offers government subsidized healthcare isn't this 'tax' a violation of free commerce?
7. IF, the affordable care act is a tax*, shouldn't all insurance premiums go directly to a government entity?
8. IF, the affordable care act is a tax*, when, how and why did the government give a private industry, health care insurance, the right, power, and/or authority to collect payments for services rendered as taxes?
9. Citizens of America have the right to contract! That is, hire someone for a specific job, task, or to provide a service! They also have the right to refuse to contract without fear of fines, penalties, or violating restrictive government policies! This is the definition of government overreach, violating the peoples right to refuse to contract, and further financially harming them with mandatory fines for exercising that right!
10. Since the government requires people to have health insurance, and have called it a tax, does that mean ALL 'services' received by a consumer are 'taxes', or just insurance, or just health insurance?
11. IF health insurance, or any other 'service' type product purchased by a consumer, is a 'tax' - WHY are they allowed and/or required to charge and collect 'sales', or any other, tax on the transaction? Isn't that taxing a tax?
12. The Constitution** gives Congress the power to regulate commerce***. Where does the Constitution mention creating a financial burden on the people?

When 'regulating' commerce goes to far it becomes totalitarianism! Regulating commerce, in the old sense of the word, should be restricted to ensuring 'fair' trade between the states, foreign countries with the united State of America, and with Indian tribes, not the kind or type services offered, the products sold, how much they produced, manufactured, or have in storage, especially when the government, either by design or accident, violate the people's rights! As we have seen, flooding the market with a variety of products, especially vehicles, does not drive the price down, the manufacturing costs up, or otherwise 'damage' the economy, the people, the state, or the federal government.

*Tax

law refers to the rules made by the government to collect revenues. Taxes can be imposed on individuals, businesses, corporations, and other legal entities.

**Article I, Section 8, Clause 3

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

***Commerce.

The exchange of goods, products, or any type of Personal Property. Trade and traffic carried on between different peoples or states and its inhabitants, including not only the purchase, sale, and exchange of commodities but also the instrumentalities, agencies, and means by which business is accomplished.

Regardless of how the government or any other entity tries to twist the word commerce to fit their desired narrative: Commerce is the necessary actions that keep businesses in business, i.e. purchasing wholesale or manufacturing products for retail sale such as the USA contracting with foreign countries for goods and services and the exchange there of for the benefit of the respective countries, manufacturers producing products for retail sale - from the manufacturer/producer to a retailer NOT from the retailer to the consumer! Employees do not engage in commerce when they exchange their time and effort for benefits and/or monetary gain - that is a barter - and NOT subject to taxes! The exchange of paper bills and coins or an electronic transaction is a barter; instead of working or exchanging something else of equal or greater value for the item!

How Law Fails

The following case were found at saylordotorg.githun.io

Generally a defendant’s status in society is not a criminal act, such as being an alcoholic or a drug addict. Status is who the defendant is, not what the defendant does. Similar to punishment for an involuntary act, when the government punishes an individual for status, it is essentially targeting that individual for circumstances that are outside his or her control. This punishment may be cruel and unusual pursuant to the Eighth Amendment if it is disproportionate to the defendant’s behavior.

In Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the US Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional as cruel and unusual punishment pursuant to the Eighth Amendment to punish an individual for the status of being a drug addict—even if the drugs to which the defendant is addicted are illegal. 

The Court compared drug addiction to an illness, such as leprosy or venereal disease. Punishing a defendant for being sick not only is inhumane but also does not specifically deter, similar to a punishment for an involuntary act.

In contrast, the case of Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514 (1968), the US Supreme Court upheld the defendant’s conviction for “drunk in public,” in spite of the defendant’s status as an alcoholic. The Court held that it is difficult but not impossible for an alcoholic to resist the urge to drink, so the behavior the statute criminalized was voluntary. 

Also, the Court ruled that the state has an interest in treating alcoholism and preventing alcohol-related crimes that could injure the defendant and others. Pursuant to Powell, statutes that criminalize voluntary acts that arise from status are constitutional under the Eighth Amendment.

If the defendant can control the actions at issue in spite of his or her status, the defendant’s conduct can be constitutionally criminalized and punished pursuant to the Eighth Amendment. This is where the law fails to equally prosecute or protect, respectively, the perpetrator and the victims.

While it is difficult, but not impossible, for a drug addict to resist the urge to enter an altered state of mind by using drugs. It is a conscious and voluntary choice before they facilitate the introduction of drug(s) into their body. Regardless of whether that introduction is oral, injected, smoked, 'snorted', or by any other means. 

If it was impossible to resist the urge to use drugs nobody would seek treatment; let alone successfully complete a drug treatment program. 

Alcoholism is also a treatable illness which is not always 'controllable' by the alcoholic. The State should also have an interest in treating drug addicts and preventing drug addicted crimes, which generally include promoting the sale and use of illicit drugs, theft, burglary, breaking and entering, and other serious crimes which could, and often do, injure the drug addict and others, but not at the expense of innocent taxpayers who are not involved in the crime or the addicted perpetrator!

Pueblo Coordinated Election

Coming ballot issues up for vote on November 5, 2019:

What voter in their right mind would EVER vote for something like this?

 “....a voter-approved revenue change that may be collected, retained, and spent by the county consistent with this ballot issue but without statutory or constitutional limitation or condition, including article X, section 20 of the Colorado Constitution, section 29-1-301, Colorado revised statutes, or ANY other law?”

EVERY 'ballot issue' has this paragraph attached! When you ask voters to knowingly, willingly, and ILLEGALLY violate the document that was meant to RESTRAIN government, not allow it to arbitrarily grant itself MORE power, you know you are committing treason!

Ballot Issue No. 1A Vote: NO

By your own admission you are wanting to violate the Colorado Constitution yet AGAIN! This time you want NO restrictions on where and how you 'spend' those funds. As a constituent and registered voter I say absolutely NOT! This sounds like a ponzi scheme, with tax payer funds, to pocket the money and NOT be accountable for it! Section 20 already states, in part “ Revenue collected, kept, or spent illegally since four full fiscal years before a suit is filed shall be refunded with 10% annual simple interest from the initial conduct. “ admitting the state/county/local government(s) already knows they are, have been, and/or will in the future 'illegally' spend tax payer funds!

Ballot Issue No. 1B: Vote: NO

Increase taxes on marijuana (cannabis)? Really?? We, the residents of Pueblo, have already been asked/refunded the EXCESS tax you collected on 'marijuana' sales because you can't keep your accounting straight. Within this ballot the authors admit they are NOT going to fund more scholarships and put the increased funds toward the over crowding problem at the jail. NO, more taxes until YOU can spend the already collected funds on projects YOU said needed to be funded with the previous tax increases! Having the LOWEST 'marijuana' tax rates in the state is a GOOD thing! As for the over crowding in the Pueblo county jail or the Pueblo city jail, maybe the law makers should STOP making laws that violate the citizens rights, while aiding and abetting the criminal illegals in this city/state, and stop arresting citizens for disobeying those unConstitutional restrictions you want to call laws! Article X, Section 20, of the Colorado Constitution, already states, in part “Revenue collected, kept, or spent illegally since four full fiscal years before a suit is filed shall be refunded with 10% annual simple interest from the initial conduct.” admitting the state/county/local government(s) already knows they are, have been, and/or will in the future 'illegally' spend tax payer funds! Now you want remove the ability for the citizens to hold the city accountable for violating ANY law!

Ballot Issue No. 4A Vote: NO

WHY do the schools have such HUGE debts? Issues at the schools should have been addressed BEFORE they became 'critical' issues! The fact that the schools are in debt, needing 'critical' repairs, and requesting MORE tax payer funds tells me that previous funding was NOT used appropriately!Creating a Citizen's Bond Advisory Committee, aka wasting more tax payer funds, to 'ensure transparency of spending associated with the bond issue' is an admission the city has, in the past, and will in the future misappropriate funds if they are not carefully watched.

Ballot Issue No. 4B Vote NO

For the same reasons as Ballot Issue No. 4A!

Ballot Issue No. 5A Vote: NO

Once bonds for schools are issued there is NO end to the 'payments' or the requested increase in taxes. Schools, politicians, city council members, and state representatives see a money pit. When they run out of money, because the requested amount is NEVER enough, they turn to the residents and request more and more and more... with no end in sight.

Ballot Issue No. 6A Vote: NO

Pueblo West, wants to be their own city/town, and now want the entire state to raise taxes to fund a fire department for them?! The entire state of Colorado should not be investing in ONE small development! Another 'exception' to the Colorado Constitution, imagine that! You want the residents of the city of Pueblo to vote on 'issues' that will affect the ENTIRE state – what kind of garbage are you trying to sell? 

Ballot Issue No. 6B Vote: NO

All taxes are just one of the many ways governments punish the residents of a city, county, state, and/or nation for being a citizen! You are being VERY serious about NOT being restrained by ANY law while punishing the citizens for MINOR infractions of the unConstitutional restrictions YOU want to call laws!

Ballot Issue 6C Vote: NO

Again you want to knowingly, willingly, and illegally violate the Colorado Constitution. Since you can't/won't/don't operate within the parameters of the restriction set forth in the Constitution maybe it is time for ALL residents of Colorado to rethink the elected officials we have 'running' the various governments!

Since the citizens/residents of Pueblo voted NO on a previous ballot issue to allow “a voter-approved revenue change that may be collected, retained, and spent by the county consistent with this ballot issue but without statutory or constitutional limitation or condition, including article X, section 20 of the Colorado Constitution, section 29-1-301, Colorado revised statutes, or ANY other law.” you think it is appropriate to put it on ALL ballot issues?

NO means NO!

The Deterioration of Nancy Pelosi

Oct 2010 - Pelosi Admits the dems have and are working their plans to take over the government! Nancy Pelosi Makes a Fool of Herself on Charlie Rose's Show!















March 2017 Nancy Pelosi utters gibberish, slurs statements, repeats words! it isn't what she is saying as much as it is how she is saying it! Stumbling over words, repeating thoughts, strange facial spasms!














June 2017 Nancy Pelosi confused about time of day, forgets latest Russia accusations -- 6 minutes later! She makes a claim Trump is attacking medicaid - which is dangerous to children and other living things!

She claims Russia hacked the American election in 2016 and 21 states were compromised - then can't remember what she said!

She claims America has to 'pussyfoot' around when it comes to sanctions on Russia!

Oct 2017 Nancy Pelosi face spasms mar speech; utters gibberish! Symptoms from dementia -While symptoms of dementia can vary greatly, at least two of the following core mental functions must be significantly impaired to be considered dementia:

Memory
Communication and language
Ability to focus and pay attention
Reasoning and judgment
Visual perception

January 2019, Pelosi botches words, suffers face spasms, confuses Dems and GOP